Last Sunday, some European newspapers were quick to report a seeming change of heart by Czech President Vaclav Klaus. A change of heart usually is a sign of reconciliation. This time, however, it is not clear whether it indicates a smoother path for the European Union, or simply a change of terrain of battle.
President Klaus’s change of heart may be more precisely called a sense of resignation to the reality of the Lisbon Treaty. After the Irish referendum in which the treaty was approved, and Poland’s approval, President Klaus remained the sole EU leader who had yet to ratify it. Even the Czech Parliament has approved it.
President Klaus is a known eurosceptic. He may be Bohemian but he does not rhapsodise about the EU or the Lisbon Treaty. He believes that the Treaty is not a good thing for Europe, “for the freedom of Europe, or for the Czech Republic”.
However, last month he astounded his fellow leaders and the European institutions when he demanded an opt-out clause to protect his country from property claims made by ethnic Germans who, after World War II, were expelled from the land that is now the Czech Republic.
Other countries, like the UK, had invoked an opt-out clause. However, to spell out the reason as being to protect oneself from specific citizens of a fellow member state was extraordinary. It was bound, I thought, to oblige Germany to reject that opt-out. For how could any German politician go along with a declaration of effective discrimination against one’s own citizens?
My suspicion was that President Klaus was in fact trying to provoke a rejection. That way, he would try to off load responsibility for wrecking the treaty. In choosing that particular reason, he had also cunningly found a way to justify overriding his own Parliament, since I believe that his stance on the cause of protection against claims by ethnic Germans has wide popular Czech backing.
I still believe this was his strategy. However, the most recent interview he gave a Czech newspaper suggests he came round to seeing that it would not work. In his words, the European train has already travelled too far and too fast for it to be stopped.
Some observers quickly surmised that the change of mind had direct implications for Tony Blair, who is favoured by many to become the first EU President envisaged by the Treaty. I am myself not so sure.
It is not just that Angela Merkel is said to have her doubts. I think it is a bit complicated for a Europe to have as President a politician who is held partly responsible for the unpopular Iraq war, when Europe keeps declaring it wants its institutions to be closer to the people.
Of course, it might happen anyway. Complicated relationships are par for the course in politics. My own relationship to the Lisbon Treaty is hardly simple, because although I am convinced that European integration and streamlining is good for all member states, had I remained a national MP, I would have wanted to express my strong reservations as long as a post of Commissioner was not guaranteed for Malta.
The implications of the Klaus apparent decision to ratify the Treaty do not necessarily lead to simplicity on the European front, either. The Czech President’s decision has implications for another Englishman, David Cameron, who may soon be the UK’s Prime Minister.
Mr Cameron has promised a UK referendum on the Treaty should he find himself in government without the treaty having yet come into force. This was a promise he made, it is said, to placate the eurosceptic forces in his party, as well as voters who might otherwise defect to the UK Independence Party.
President Klaus’s decision could complicate matters for Mr Cameron. On the one hand, it absolves him of the promise to hold a referendum. Had a referendum been held and won by sceptics, with Prime Minister Cameron campaigning against the Treaty, the UK would have a delicate period of negotiations with Europe. After all, the other member states could decide to go ahead with the treaty (which the UK has already approved) and invite the UK to leave the Union if it did not like it.
However, the fact that a referendum will now not be on the Conservative electoral programme, after the same party has stoked euroscepticism, may make it vulnerable to a loss of voters to a party to its right. Such a loss of votes, if significant, could endanger the Conservative chances of winning the general election outright, or at least with a workable majority.
So Europe has some interesting times ahead, although they will demand from all of us the need to show Europe’s relevance to bread and butter issues that matter to voters.
Dr Attard Montalto is a Labour member of the European Parliament.